Comments on: Christopher Dodd, the Angry Lieberman Supporter http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2006/05/26/dodd-angry-for-lieberman/ When old landmarks crumble, established roads no longer lead the way. New paths open to those with an irregular eye. Our news is unfit for print. Sun, 12 Feb 2012 21:24:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Peregrin Wood http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2006/05/26/dodd-angry-for-lieberman/comment-page-1/#comment-174034 Peregrin Wood Wed, 26 Jul 2006 01:10:58 +0000 http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2006/05/26/dodd-angry-for-lieberman/#comment-174034 Dan, Progressive is not the same thing as Democrat. There are some Democrats who are progressives. Ned Lamont is a progressive Democrat. Joseph Lieberman is not. The primary exists to tell who will represent the Democrats in Connecticut. Even if Lieberman wins the primary, that won't mean that he represents Connecticut progressives well. Dan,

Progressive is not the same thing as Democrat. There are some Democrats who are progressives. Ned Lamont is a progressive Democrat. Joseph Lieberman is not. The primary exists to tell who will represent the Democrats in Connecticut. Even if Lieberman wins the primary, that won’t mean that he represents Connecticut progressives well.

]]> By: Dan http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2006/05/26/dodd-angry-for-lieberman/comment-page-1/#comment-173958 Dan Tue, 25 Jul 2006 20:44:52 +0000 http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2006/05/26/dodd-angry-for-lieberman/#comment-173958 It is a shame, Mr. Wood, that we have to listen to you tell us who does and does not represent progressive Connecticut. In fact, neither you nor anyone else can tell us that Sen. Lieberman does not represent progressive Connecticut. I wonder why this has been such a close race. Perhaps this is the precide reason we have primary elections--in order to tell us who does and does not represent Connecticut well. It is a shame, Mr. Wood, that we have to listen to you tell us who does and does not represent progressive Connecticut. In fact, neither you nor anyone else can tell us that Sen. Lieberman does not represent progressive Connecticut. I wonder why this has been such a close race. Perhaps this is the precide reason we have primary elections–in order to tell us who does and does not represent Connecticut well.

]]> By: Peregrin Wood http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2006/05/26/dodd-angry-for-lieberman/comment-page-1/#comment-144048 Peregrin Wood Thu, 01 Jun 2006 03:54:46 +0000 http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2006/05/26/dodd-angry-for-lieberman/#comment-144048 Jess, Your argument would make sense, but for the simple fact that Joseph Lieberman's politics do NOT represent progressive Connecticut well. So, by collaborating with Joseph Lieberman, Christopher Dodd is not representing his constituents well either. The ends to which they are working are not the right ends, so no matter how efficient their little operation is, it's disfunctional. Jess,

Your argument would make sense, but for the simple fact that Joseph Lieberman’s politics do NOT represent progressive Connecticut well. So, by collaborating with Joseph Lieberman, Christopher Dodd is not representing his constituents well either.

The ends to which they are working are not the right ends, so no matter how efficient their little operation is, it’s disfunctional.

]]> By: jess http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2006/05/26/dodd-angry-for-lieberman/comment-page-1/#comment-143638 jess Wed, 31 May 2006 21:08:37 +0000 http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2006/05/26/dodd-angry-for-lieberman/#comment-143638 It makes sense that of any senators Lieberman, would get support from his counterpart from CT. If they want to get things done for CT in DC the whole Connecticut delegation has to work together well, and Lieberman and Dodd have a good working relaitonship, so there is no reason for Dodd to support anything that would upset that. A senator's primary job is to represent thier constituents, and if he thinks he can be a more effective senator for his consituents by working with Lieberman instead of Lamont, then he's doing his job well by supporting him. Whether or not I, (or Dodd for that matter) agree with Lieberman's stance on Iraq is a different issue. It makes sense that of any senators Lieberman, would get support from his counterpart from CT. If they want to get things done for CT in DC the whole Connecticut delegation has to work together well, and Lieberman and Dodd have a good working relaitonship, so there is no reason for Dodd to support anything that would upset that. A senator’s primary job is to represent thier constituents, and if he thinks he can be a more effective senator for his consituents by working with Lieberman instead of Lamont, then he’s doing his job well by supporting him. Whether or not I, (or Dodd for that matter) agree with Lieberman’s stance on Iraq is a different issue.

]]> By: Carl D. http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2006/05/26/dodd-angry-for-lieberman/comment-page-1/#comment-136029 Carl D. Fri, 26 May 2006 13:19:09 +0000 http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2006/05/26/dodd-angry-for-lieberman/#comment-136029 Well, there's that, and the whole grooming thing. If he wants to be the next president, Chris Dodd's just going to have to find a new hairdresser. Well, there’s that, and the whole grooming thing. If he wants to be the next president, Chris Dodd’s just going to have to find a new hairdresser.

]]>